Ireland’s former attorney-general has backed the broad thrust of the working group report on justice and home affairs, prepared for the Convention.

Chaired by his compatriot, former premier John Bruton, the group’s majority view is that EU crime-busting activities should be limited to those falling within the serious offence category with a cross-border dimension.

Such offences would include money laundering, drug smuggling and trafficking in women and children.

Speaking last weekend, Byrne argued that the Union needed to elaborate on clauses in the Amsterdam Treaty about ensuring a coordinated response to

cross-border crime.

“We need to be more accurate about what sort of crimes we are talking about,” he said.

“Without that degree of specificity, we could introduce the view that it’s

desirable to harmonise the criminal law of member states on murder and rape.

“That’s certainly not on my mind, nor indeed is it on the mind of those in a position to influence EU decisions that I’ve spoken to.”

Byrne also contended that EU law would have to take account of some of the core principles in the common law system favoured in Britain and Ireland – such as the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise.

Under common law, a judge plays the role of a neutral referee in proceedings.

But recourse to civil law is more frequent incontinental Europe, where magistrates often have considerable powers of investigation.

“It would be difficult for the common law system to engage in a proximation of laws, if there weren’t some concessions made on the issue of the common law

system,” Byrne added.

“I have reason to believe those familiar with the civil law system might be open to that kind of approach.”

The Irishman maintained that common law – and especially its provisions on protecting the accused – is consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights and that some of its main tenets have been upheld by the Strasbourg-based court which interprets that convention.